|
I'm not trying to be snide or insulting, but aside from 'these spells/powers should never have belonged to wizards/sorcerers in the first place', the whole thing with psionics really appears to be people wanting new classes when it really seems that a non-Vancian way to work what amounts to magic would actually be the target result. Of course I could be wrong, but that's honestly what it looks like, and may be the root, whether consciously known or not, for the anti-psionics camp.To all intents and purposes, that's pretty much what half of psionics is, non-vancian magic. The other half is that it's rooted in popular culture paranormal research - the 'scientific approach to the paranormal' if you will. I suppose it gives it a clearer focus of cause and effect than the Vancioan magic of the core system which started life as Gary Gygax making up spells off the top of his head.
There is an internal logic to psionics that Vancian lacks, and the PP system interlocks with that very well. However, Vancian is core and rooted deeply into D&D, so it has to stay. For some, psionics is just a way of getting non-vancian magic, for others it's a lot more than that.
I'm looking for the 'a lot more than that' part to try to understand the strong desire a number of people hold for it. As I said, I've really only been able to find the non-vancian reasoning, and reasoning that seems to be text about flavor etc which just boils down to another way of saying non-vancian. I agree that a non-vancian system would feel more like magic in pretty much every single way I've read or imagined it. Even still, I can only take that so far as 'alternate magic system' not 'new (for purposes of PFRPG) classes'.
I'm looking for the 'a lot more than that' part to try to understand the strong desire a number of people hold for it. As I said, I've really only been able to find the non-vancian reasoning, and reasoning that seems to be text about flavor etc which just boils down to another way of saying non-vancian. I agree that a non-vancian system would feel more like magic in pretty much every single way I've read or imagined it. Even still, I can only take that so far as 'alternate magic system' not 'new (for purposes of PFRPG) classes'.
I suppose it's like art ... I cannot tell you exactly what it is that makes something 'art' for me, but I know it when I see it.
|
|
I'm looking for the 'a lot more than that' part to try to understand the strong desire a number of people hold for it. As I said, I've really only been able to find the non-vancian reasoning, and reasoning that seems to be text about flavor etc which just boils down to another way of saying non-vancian. I agree that a non-vancian system would feel more like magic in pretty much every single way I've read or imagined it. Even still, I can only take that so far as 'alternate magic system' not 'new (for purposes of PFRPG) classes'.I suppose it's like art ... I cannot tell you exactly what it is that makes something 'art' for me, but I know it when I see it.
:-(
I understand the position, but it makes me sad. I was hoping for something more concrete...anyone else.
|
I'm looking for the 'a lot more than that' part to try to understand the strong desire a number of people hold for it. As I said, I've really only been able to find the non-vancian reasoning, and reasoning that seems to be text about flavor etc which just boils down to another way of saying non-vancian. I agree that a non-vancian system would feel more like magic in pretty much every single way I've read or imagined it. Even still, I can only take that so far as 'alternate magic system' not 'new (for purposes of PFRPG) classes'.I suppose it's like art ... I cannot tell you exactly what it is that makes something 'art' for me, but I know it when I see it.:-(
I understand the position, but it makes me sad. I was hoping for something more concrete...anyone else.
We like it because it is different. Which is also why it is hated on.
I think there is also an element of: "if it's better than the wizard can do it, it must be broken" too. At the same time, there's also calls for "if you can't do anything that magic can't do, why bother?"
It's very frustrating, because you cannot please both of these mutually exclusive critics.
I understand what you are asking, Runnetib, and all I can answer is that when you find a mechanical system in a game that mimics pretty much exactly how you envisage things to work in real life, yet with a simple and logical system, it 'clicks'. That's the case with the psionics system, it's just the right fusion between the D&D game mechanics and the way I feel psychic powers should work.
I don't dislike Vancian, I can work with it, it's OK. The psionics system with power points and augments is way better - not in results, but in feel.
|
|
I'll give it a go. The appeal of the concept of psionics is one of imposing one's will on the universe. The difference from magic is that in magic one is harnessing external forces as a tool to affect the world while psionics is purely a matter of will and inner strength/focus. I think it - it happens vs. I use this to make something happen.I'm looking for the 'a lot more than that' part to try to understand the strong desire a number of people hold for it. As I said, I've really only been able to find the non-vancian reasoning, and reasoning that seems to be text about flavor etc which just boils down to another way of saying non-vancian. I agree that a non-vancian system would feel more like magic in pretty much every single way I've read or imagined it. Even still, I can only take that so far as 'alternate magic system' not 'new (for purposes of PFRPG) classes'.I suppose it's like art ... I cannot tell you exactly what it is that makes something 'art' for me, but I know it when I see it.:-(
I understand the position, but it makes me sad. I was hoping for something more concrete...anyone else.
That's pretty much how I view magic...which is why I poster earlier in this thread that I feel a points-based system would feel more like the magic I read in fantasy literature, or even watch on some shows, like the new-ish BBC Merlin. I've got no problem with learning a spell from a book or what-have-you, like Merlin had to do at least a few times in the first season, or how the Harry Potter gang has to, but they don't need to prepare them and fit them into slots. Recent thinking has me viewing the wizard as really being the odd duck out. From my admittedly limited understanding of psionics, I believe that while spontaneous and without slots, they still need either/both focus or a focus (crystal)? Clerics and Druids have their 'divine foci', holy symbol and holly and mistletoe respectively, and can cast flavored spells spontaneously, while the sorcerer (despite an unwillingness or unwant to do so) can be flavored into a psionic with really only the slots vs. points in the way. Bards use music, which is broadly comparable to the Wishsong from Terry Brooks' Shannara series. I realize the divine foci are only required for certain spells, but my 'understanding' of psionic focus puts them even. I may be wrong.
I love the 3.5 psionics mechanics, although I think they may be closer to a non-Vancian magic system than an implementation of will made manifest. Based on this, I agree with what I believe is one of your assessments - much of the opposition stems from these mechanics being seen as a threat to Vancian casting.
There's another thread on here somewhere that James Jacobs posts in regarding what their current plans are, should they do psionics at all, and that is reshaping it into a more Vancian-like system. I think it's called something like "Vancian vs. Point-Based Casting" or something.
Anyway...
If this comes off as insulting, it isn't meant that way, and I could very well just be missing the link... But the way I read your reasoning is pretty much just as I said I've come up with already. Because Vancian doesn't properly fit the feel and flavor of magic, and the system used to run psionics (PP, scaling, etc.) does. Mind you, I agree with that sentiment, but still see it as 'change magic into that' instead of 'make new classes that work off a system of how magic should be handled, but don't call it magic, even though it's how we think magic should work'.
Maybe I should rephrase my question, as I don't think I asked precisely what I wanted to know...though I can't guarantee this query will work any better...
Why do you (plural/general) want *new* classes that use a mechanic that better fits the feel/flavor/majority portrayal of magic instead of putting that mechanic to use over the current strange/clunky/illogical system?
I know, I know, I'm sounding like a broken record, but I'm really trying to find if there's something more to it than being what fits people's view of what magic should be.
|
|
I understand what you are asking, Runnetib, and all I can answer is that when you find a mechanical system in a game that mimics pretty much exactly how you envisage things to work in real life, yet with a simple and logical system, it 'clicks'. That's the case with the psionics system, it's just the right fusion between the D&D game mechanics and the way I feel psychic powers should work.
I don't dislike Vancian, I can work with it, it's OK. The psionics system with power points and augments is way better - not in results, but in feel.
See, this is what I totally agree with. The psionics system. Would you (or any other psionics supporter [heehee, brain bra]) {wow, I should not still be awake} be cool/fine/support a porting and overlay of the system (points, augments, the whole shebang) without the 'psionic' class(es)?
*This of course in no way means such a thing will happen...just a further exercise on my road to understanding.
See, this is what I totally agree with. The psionics system. Would you (or any other psionics supporter [heehee, brain bra]) {wow, I should not still be awake} be cool/fine/support a porting and overlay of the system (points, augments, the whole shebang) without the 'psionic' class(es)?
*This of course in no way means such a thing will happen...just a further exercise on my road to understanding.
That depends by what you mean - I would like a backwards compatible system, personally, but I don't care if you rename the classes to fit the fantasy genre better - psions could be called mystics, wilders could be savants, for example, and powers could be renamed. The talk of 'sci-fi' feel of psionics is in part down to the names of powers and talents. You could easily relabel the specialisations with no issues at all:
Psychokinesis = EnergyMetacreativity = Creation
Telepathy = Thought
Clairsentience = Farsight
Psychometabolism = Life
Pscyhoportation = Movement
To me the fluff has never been an issue, it's just fancy names given by the games designers to what the powers do.
I also don't mind if magic is run on a similar system.
My only issue would be with a system that wasn't backward compatible (and so far as I am concerned, replacing the PP mechanic with a Vancian system isn't) but that gave no space to a backward compatible system. The way Paizo have proposed is to go with a new system that will have the place psionics used to fill in Golarian, but does not call itself psionics - this leaves the 3.5 psionics lovers' field open for a 3pp (like Dreamscarred) to fill that need without anyone feeling they have something they didn't want thrust on them.
Why do you (plural/general) want *new* classes that use a mechanic that better fits the feel/flavor/majority portrayal of magic instead of putting that mechanic to use over the current strange/clunky/illogical system?I want different groups of casting classes to use different magic systems:
I think Vancian casting is perfect for wizards and (especially) alchemists.
I think power points are perfect for psionic classes.I think any system that forces one of those groups to use the magic system that is better suited for the other group is trying to fit round pegs into square holes, and has failed to live up to its potential.
+1.
I am a great fan of multiple mechanics, not one, myself.
I think Vancian casting is perfect for wizards and (especially) alchemists.
I think power points are perfect for psionic classes.I think any system that forces one of those groups to use the magic system that is better suited for the other group is trying to fit round pegs into square holes, and has failed to live up to its potential.
This is what the arguement is from my perspective:
"I want psionics to have spell points because I like it better then Vancian magic. It seems more like the way magic should work to me."
"Why not just make psionics Vancian and make an alternate spell point system?"
"Because spell points are what gives psionics its character."
"But your saying that you think magic works conceptually better as a spell point system. Why not just run one system, then you can have both magic you like and run psionics that work the way you want."
"But then psionics would loose all their character"
"So what really makes psychics worth having classes then?"
"Well I think its the spell point which is perfect for psionics while the vancian is perfect for magic."
"It seems like a lot of people on both sides disagree with you."
So far the only arguement that is really holding water with me is Dabbler's call for backward compatibility. As far as what a system is better suited to, it depends on what you're trying for when you design a game. If I want to run a low magic game, both the Vancian and 3.5 Psionic system would work poorly for that. It's not a fault of the system for being to powerful for a concept it wasn't designed for. The folks at Paizo like Vancian casting for Pathfinder, it does what they want it to do.
Skaorn, I think you are finding that there are a lot of different opinions about psionics. Some like it because the power point system works well in concert with the way the powers are designed and the thematic nature of the system. Some prefer it simply because it is a form of magic that isn't Vancian. Others for many other reasons, but they are different reasons. I don't think any of them is invalid, BTW, because liking (or for that matter disliking) something is irrational, so you don't need a logical reason for liking it. Looking for one is like looking for a reason for liking the Mona Lisa.
I face the same problem when finding out what people don't like about psionics - especially when you have one side saying:
"It's pointless, it doesn't do much that magic cannot do, so why bother?"
and the other say:
"It's broken, it does things magic cannot do, so it shouldn't be allowed!"
At that point you know that no answer will satisfy everyone ... so don't bother trying.
As far as I am concerned the real issues are:
Is the system balanced with the rest of the core systems?
Is it going to sell well if it's made?
Can the publishers do a good job of making it?
@Dabbler- First off, I'm not trying to attack what you (as in those who like 3.5 Psionics) like, and if any one thinks that then I sincerly apologize, it was not my intent. However, what I'm doing is the exact same thing your doing, trying to persuade other people with reason rather then yelling and name calling. We might not be able to persuade each other but there are other people who might read this and change their minds. So, unless you're planning on stopping, don't expect other people to stop posting their arguements.
I do have to point out again that you left out people not liking psionics as it adds an additional rules system ;p.
I do have to point out again that you left out people not liking psionics as it adds an additional rules system ;p.
I left out a lot of things, I was making an observation, not trying to dissuade you. I'm not offended by debate, either, it's always healthy.
Is the system balanced with the rest of the core systems?
-Now this one may be tricky. Were 3.0 psionics balance? Not really, since the attack/defense modes were a nightmare when used in combat against a non-psionic foe. But, in terms of powers, I felt they were more balanced than 3.5 psionics.
I never played the 3.0 psionics, but the 3.5 system I did play extensively and found it balanced very well with the core system (which may be an oxymoron as the core system wasn't very balanced itself - what I mean is, it balanced well with arcane and divine magic).
Are there things in it that need fixing? Sure, just as there were in the core system, but I think these come down to poorly thought out powers and bad wording, not the fundamental mechanics. I've done a lot of number crunching on that compared to core models, and everything to me says balanced.
Would it be an interesting product or article, if we picked up our Pathfinderized version of psionics, and renamed things to work in an "arcane" framework?
It'd be an interesting project to be honest and I'd always love a challenge - our Mentalis Design imprint could very well go with such a release. :)
Psion -> Thaumaturge
Psychic Warrior -> Swordmage
Wilder -> Maven
Soulknife -> Arcblade
One can even do a reflavor for more "naturalistic" themes, such as totems:
Psion -> Shaman
Psychic Warrior -> Totem Warrior
Wilder -> Wildling
Soulknife -> Shifter (mindblade becoming claws and bite)
Yeah... a product doing "variant flavors" for our Core Psionics system could be a cool thing. Whatya think?
It's doable, certainly - but then these are minor changes that any DM can use to 're-skin' psionics. You could sum them up on one page, it wouldn't take an alternative product.
Personally I always liked Psionics because it wasnt magick. I made me feal more like I was playing a Deryni, Jedi, Araki Fremen, or a Shaolin Monk or even someone from Darkover or something :) Using powers like Professor X or Phoenix :) Only in a westernized fantasy setting. I loved the Psionicist and then the 3.5 Psionic characters. And a Pathfinder version of the 3.5 is awesome. As a DM I never let things get out of ballance as I just let the game get creative enough to handle whatever the players throw at me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM who's used psionics extensively, I've found I prefer it as a system immensely over core casting for both its balance, intuitive mechanics, and of course the fact that a reserve of supernatural energies encompass far more fantasy examples of magic than the "magic bullets" of core casting (get your 3rd level revolvers loaded for the day!).
The 3.5 psionics fixed all the problems that the 3.0 psionics had (I've played with both systems extensively). The 3.0 system was horribly underpowered in most areas while being overpowered and chaotic in others; while the 3.5 system addressed the problems with psionics being a "tacked on system" that didn't function next to core materials.
In my experience, the only people that nay-say about psionics generally haven't shown me they actually know what they're talking about. That may sound insulting by nature, but let me explain before anyone tosses in a few pieces of charcoal. What I mean is, in my experiences people that have told me psionics is unbalanaced were either A) giving me "well I know this guy that uses them" or "I don't know it myself, but this one guy" stories, and openly displayed and admitted that they knew nothing about psionics but were downing it anyway, or B) they were breaking the rules or mis-reading powers (the famed "He dealt 6d10 damage at 1st level by spending all his points" nonsense springs to mind). Even people that have sworn to me (on these very boards even, about a year ago) that they used and knew the rules couldn't even cite examples. "Just trust me, I know" seemed to be the extent of most of their arguments. So I admittedly don't expect too much when I enter in to these things.
All that being said, I'll try to shed a little light on reasons my players and I enjoy psionics.
1) The power point system is intuitive. Unlike the (honestly silly) vancian casting system, which does not lend itself well to spontaneous casters like sorcerers and bards.
1.5) Vancian casting has its origins in the Dying Earth series by none other than Jack Vance (hence the term Vancian casting). To sum it up quickly, you have wizards who trap magic in their minds with their spells, and when you cast the spell it disappears from your mind (IE - Magic/Mind Bullets). Granddaddy Gygaxx picked up this for D&D (and even many D&D novels don't follow D&D / Vancian casting).
2) The ability to augment powers to retain usefulness. The augmenting is the D&D equivalent of being able to take Magic Missile and it still be useful at high levels. In some ways its like a more elegant form of metamagic, while also cutting down on redundancy.
2.5) Due to augmenting, repeat spells like Charm Person, Charm Animal, Charm Monster, and so forth are less needed since augmenting it to the equivalent cost of a higher level power can allow you to affect more targets, receive higher benefits, and so forth. In 3.5, there are psionic powers which have chains (such as lesser, normal, greater) but these powers are generally psionic versions of existing spells (which generally say "As *spell name here* except as noted here").
3) The psionics system improves what is generally a weaker point of core casting, and that's direct damage. Core blasters are already handicapped by default (especially compared to control or (de)buff spells) with the combination of poor damage to HP ratios, energy resistances, and saving throws.
In short, compare the damage that a 20th level wizard deals with meteor swarm (an average of 112 before energy resistance or damage reductions, assuming your target fails the save. If the target makes the save, it's 56, which can then be reduced to 26 with a 2nd level Resist Energy) to a 20th level fighter with a glaive (who can sport a +38 damage modifier before factoring weapon specialization or weapon training before even rolling damage). Couple this with blasting's tendency to bit highly hit-or-miss. If you're a sorcerer with fireball and you encounter a fire elemental, dragon, fire giant, or whatever, you likely cannot contribute.
Psionic blasting is a bit stronger and more versatile, while psionics doesn't get much in the way of battlefield control powers (the ones like ectoplasmic wall are less powerful than the magic equivalents). Psionic characters can learn a power (say energy ball, the psionic equivalent to fireball) and choose an energy type when they use it; so they could pick fire (for bonus damage), cold (extra damage and targets fortitude), electricity (more accurate or harder to resist), or sonic (deals less damage but almost nothing resists it). This means that you can contribute a bit more steadily while not being completely useless when you run into something that's immune or heavily resistant to your favorite powers.
This by its nature gives psionics are slightly different feel. Psionics tends to be better at blasting, focuses on self-buffing, and mind-affecting powers, equal in summoning, weaker at battlefield control / transmutation, virtually no necromancy, and about equal an divination style effects. So not only is it different but it fills slightly different focuses by default.
4) Psionics fills a wide variety of niches. The psionics system is easily re-fluffable to fill in for inner reserves of power of all kinds. The Pathfinder monk is a wonderful re-write, but we (my group) cured the 3.5 monk by slapping psychic warrior powers on them a long time ago (giving them a chi/ki/qi/prana system that allowed them to shrug off damage, improve their unarmed strikes, run on water, etc).
Psionics can fill most magic archtypes as easily or easier than core casting (much of this being due to the reserves vs magic bullets of the two systems).
5) Psionics make a great alternative to core casting for those who don't like it. I have one friend who generally plays warrior types. Casters are, by his description, too complicated and annoying, and preparing spells or keeping track of them annoys him. He however played a psion and loved it, since he only had 1 number to track (like it points) and that was all the book-keeping he had to do to get similar effects mechanically.
6) This simplicity also makes psionics a better system for introducing new players to the game. In my 10 years of introducing new players to D&D, the majority of them do not immediately understand or adapt well to the vancian style casting, but most catch on to the point system exceptionally quickly. This is perhaps due to it being the favored system in most forms of computer based RPGs. Even the almighty Final Fantasy dropped Vancian casting after the 1st game in favor of a point system.
7) The most important part is that both systems can coexist in the same campaign. In fact, all the campaigns I've ran allow, feature, and make use of psionics. 3.5 Psionics and Pathfinder core magic are strongly balanced alongside one another due to transparency.
I have several pathfinder adventure paths purchased in bookstores (and several modules ordered off the paizo store) and I've had players play psions, psychic warriors, and wilders right alongside the other classes with no troubles (the psionic characters are a bit weak compared to the PF classes but I'm 80% done with a complete conversion and revision of 3.5 psionics to the Pathfinder system and working, which is taking care of the last part).
.............
In closing, there's a lot to the 3.5 Psionics system that people will hold on to. There is a lot to love. If you can't provide it in all its glory, then you might as well not provide it, because those who want it want it for a reason. They don't want core casting by a different name. They want Psionics.
{stuff}
Er, yeah, what you said!
|
|
Lots of stuff
Elegantly written and argued in detail.
I hope that Dreamscarred Press' release is everything you want it to be.
You don't, to my mind, appear to be celebrating psionics, you are celebrating power points.
For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
He has. he has also said that it won't be psionics. As in, it will fill the place in Golarian that psionics filled in 3.5, but will be called something different, have different classes, etc. The idea is that it will not clash with the DSP psionics and both can be used in conjunction ... and this is win/win: those that didn't like 3.5 psionics have an alternate 'mind magic' system. Those that did can use the DSP conversion without it clashing with any official product.
Lots of stuffElegantly written and argued in detail.
I hope that Dreamscarred Press' release is everything you want it to be.
You don't, to my mind, appear to be celebrating psionics, you are celebrating power points.For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
To me, psionics and power points are linked on a fundamental level. I don't really like psionics represented to by Vancian style magic, because to me the mind-bullets system, ironically, doesn't fit will with the overall feel of psionics.
I like the fluff as well. There's a large amount of crystal association and astral energies, with has a history in both magic and mental disciplines in real life (as well as wood) which both are inspired by.
I hope dreamscarred press does a great job, and I'm sure they will (I'm still writing a psionics core book anyway), but I've heard too many things that strikes me as a step in the wrong direction (such as weakening psionic blasting). I may just be misinformed, but I have my fingers crossed.
By the way, which writer on the Paizo staff was it that said something along the lines of "Just because you have to spend a feat on it, doesn't mean exotic weapons should be better than normal weapons"? Kind of off topic, but it has some relevance in my own mind, and the fact I cannot remember bugs me. I'm thinking it was either Jason Bulmahn or James Jacobs.
Lots of stuffElegantly written and argued in detail.
I hope that Dreamscarred Press' release is everything you want it to be.
You don't, to my mind, appear to be celebrating psionics, you are celebrating power points.For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
To me, psionics and power points are linked on a fundamental level. I don't really like psionics represented to by Vancian style magic, because to me the mind-bullets system, ironically, doesn't fit will with the overall feel of psionics.
I like the fluff as well. There's a large amount of crystal association and astral energies, with has a history in both magic and mental disciplines in real life (as well as wood) which both are inspired by.
I hope dreamscarred press does a great job, and I'm sure they will (I'm still writing a psionics core book anyway), but I've heard too many things that strikes me as a step in the wrong direction (such as weakening psionic blasting). I may just be misinformed, but I have my fingers crossed.
By the way, which writer on the Paizo staff was it that said something along the lines of "Just because you have to spend a feat on it, doesn't mean exotic weapons should be better than normal weapons"? Kind of off topic, but it has some relevance in my own mind, and the fact I cannot remember bugs me. I'm thinking it was either Jason Bulmahn or James Jacobs.
I have wanted to be more involved in the playtesting so I really have no excuse if things don't come out as I like especially since I actually downloaded all of the playtest documents.
Lots of stuffElegantly written and argued in detail.
I hope that Dreamscarred Press' release is everything you want it to be.
You don't, to my mind, appear to be celebrating psionics, you are celebrating power points.For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
To me, psionics and power points are linked on a fundamental level. I don't really like psionics represented to by Vancian style magic, because to me the mind-bullets system, ironically, doesn't fit will with the overall feel of psionics.
I like the fluff as well. There's a large amount of crystal association and astral energies, with has a history in both magic and mental disciplines in real life (as well as wood) which both are inspired by.
I hope dreamscarred press does a great job, and I'm sure they will (I'm still writing a psionics core book anyway), but I've heard too many things that strikes me as a step in the wrong direction (such as weakening psionic blasting). I may just be misinformed, but I have my fingers crossed.
It was mooted to have energy powers fixed at selection, which was as close to weakening blasting as it came, but in the end it was decided that:
* For all 'normal' uses you could select energy type when you gained psionic focus.* Except for Wilders, who can do so on a wild surge.
* And for Kineticists, who can do so on a free action.
I've been involved in the project, and it's looking excellent. A lot of powers were changed in the same way that the original spells were changed for Pathfinder. The only seriously overhauled powers were the Metamorphasis powers which like the polymorph powers were given a hit with the nerf-bat and split into smaller powers. However, they now make an excellent specialisation all on their own.
Lots of stuffElegantly written and argued in detail.
I hope that Dreamscarred Press' release is everything you want it to be.
You don't, to my mind, appear to be celebrating psionics, you are celebrating power points.For official Pathfinder Psionics James Jacobs has made it clear that he favours Vancian Psionics and has not been countered by any other Paizo staff.
To me, psionics and power points are linked on a fundamental level. I don't really like psionics represented to by Vancian style magic, because to me the mind-bullets system, ironically, doesn't fit will with the overall feel of psionics.
I like the fluff as well. There's a large amount of crystal association and astral energies, with has a history in both magic and mental disciplines in real life (as well as wood) which both are inspired by.
I hope dreamscarred press does a great job, and I'm sure they will (I'm still writing a psionics core book anyway), but I've heard too many things that strikes me as a step in the wrong direction (such as weakening psionic blasting). I may just be misinformed, but I have my fingers crossed.
It was mooted to have energy powers fixed at selection, which was as close to weakening blasting as it came, but in the end it was decided that:
* For all 'normal' uses you could select energy type when you gained psionic focus.
* Except for Wilders, who can do so on a wild surge.
* And for Kineticists, who can do so on a free action.I've been involved in the project, and it's looking excellent. A lot of powers were changed in the same way that the original spells were changed for Pathfinder. The only seriously overhauled powers were the Metamorphasis powers which like the polymorph powers were given a hit with the nerf-bat and split into smaller powers. However, they now make an excellent specialisation all on their own.
With the exception of metamorphosis, the majority of what you noted is exactly what I was afraid they would do. One of the things psionics has as its niche is its a solid option for blasting because of the versatility and options for handling your damage dealing powers. By locking you into specific energy types you're weakening the psion's number one strength with blasting - versatility. As noted previously, the thing that made psionic blasters decent is they didn't get completely hosed when they ran across an enemy that was immune to their power (as a sorcerer with fireball will feel if he runs into a fire-elemental).
Blasting is demonstratively weaker than other options that casters have, but blasting powers can be fun. An easy demonstration for the weakness is the effectiveness of spells like Solid Fog, Black Tentacles, or even Slow, compared to Fireball. Damage from both spells and psionic powers doesn't scale as fast a hit points. Most monsters have an average of 4.5 hit points per level with a d8 HD before factoring in constitution, feats, or resistances. Damage (at best) scales at an average of 3.5 damage per level (usually with a saving throw for half) before factoring in resistances.
As noted in my previous post, the flat +X modifier from a 20th level fighter can easily exceed the damage of a meteor-swarm's damage before factoring in resistances (PF fighters with a +5 weapon also ignore most forms of DR). Blasting a very, very poor option in core; and people who study these things often describe it as a trap.
Psionics helps alleviate this (fire and ice deal an extra +1 damage per die, or allow you to target Fortitude against high reflex enemies), and also allows you to be a blaster without falling to uselessness (by changing from one energy type to another).
Nerfing blasting is backwards. :(
Not really, Ashiel.
Which classes are actually going to specialise in blasting? Kineticists and Wilders, who are to all intents and purposes still on the old system because kineticists can change on a free action and wilders are going to be wild-surging anyway.
For all other psionic classes, it takes one round (or with a feat, one move action) to expend and regain psionic focus and change energy types. That's hardly crippling.
If you feel that it is, go to the Dreascarred Press website and tell them so.
Don't expect any Paizo support for it though.b) Dreamscarred Press (the psionics specialized publisher) is doing a Pathfinderization of 3.5 psionics. It's in the works and progressing nicely.
We don't. One of the main reasons Paizo aren't really interested in the 3.5 psionics system is that it's a completely separate set of mechanics. Paizo's earners are the adventure paths, not selling rules, so they want their audience as broad as possible, and that means that adventures cannot assume the target audience have anything more than core. You can include a Witch (for example) with a page of extra spells, feats and class features and it works on the mechanics that the players know. Psionics, however wonderful you think the system is, is more than that.
However, the Paizo staff are aware that a large subset of Pathfinder lovers also love the 3.5 psionics system, and they are not going to want to stop those lovers playing Pathfinder (if they did, those people wouldn't buy adventures) - so while they will not support DSP's work with adventure paths and official supplements, they will certainly not publish anything to invalidate it either.
I want to see Ashiel's Psionic Handbook when it's done :)
I want to see Ashiel's Psionic Handbook when it's done :)
No problem. It's in the playtesting stages right now, for the most part. The majority of it is a conversion and remake of the original psionics. I'm trying very hard to stay true to the spirit of the 3.5 psionics system while meeting the Pathfinder standards.
A few things that stand out is the Wilder was completely re-written from the ground up, with a completely new focus (they still get wild-surges, but they no longer use the clunky psychic enervation mechanic).
Psions have been adjusted and given class features based on their disciplines, similar to PF sorcerers, wizards, and clerics. Each discipline now has a very unique feel so a Nomad and an Egoist are both very different from each other, and so forth.
Psychic Warriors received a large revision, becoming what amounts to four classes in one. Without revealing too much, you can now have traditional psywarriors, psychic warriors innately designed for focusing more on powers than a normal psychic warrior, one for monk-like, and another that is honestly a replacement for the soul-knife.
The book is nearly finished and I hope to publish it in pdf format under the OGL (ideally getting approved for the Pathfinder Compatibility Logo).
Currently, a few mechanics are being tested in regards to powers. Many of the 3.5 powers were revised with normalized augmenting; likewise since PF doesn't have XP costs (and I didn't want to give psionics material components), some powers are un-spammable due to drawbacks such as ability burn for manifesting them (making using them a decision of effect vs cost). It hits where it hurts (your stats and even level) if you pump certain powers out too readily.
If you're interested organizing a playtest, or would like to see a preview, I would be happy to oblige.
Not really, Ashiel.
Which classes are actually going to specialise in blasting? Kineticists and Wilders, who are to all intents and purposes still on the old system because kineticists can change on a free action and wilders are going to be wild-surging anyway.
For all other psionic classes, it takes one round (or with a feat, one move action) to expend and regain psionic focus and change energy types. That's hardly crippling.
If you feel that it is, go to the Dreascarred Press website and tell them so.
That's just the thing. I would rather not see the classes pidgeon-holed as such. Kineticists are naturally better at blasting because of a naturally larger selection to more blasting powers, as well as some unique useful blasting powers. Wilders can pump damage a bit better. However, that doesn't mean they should be the only ones with the option.
A friend of mine, for example, made a psychic warrior who picked up Energy Bolt via Expanded Knowledge at mid-levels, and would surprise people with a well placed energy blast at key moments. He couldn't sustain such powers for long (due to power point limitations) but he had the option and the ability to use it.
All the classes have the things they're better at, but making them the only classes for that is also bad design.
Then tell DSP. Also, you might like some of their changes - the wilder is now an excellent class, and they have given the psychic warrior some nice toys.
I cant waite for the PDF :) I loved 3nd edition Psionics, except for the soulknife after 5th level or so...
Ever since the Mind Flayer and other Psychic Iconic races of 2nd edition Psionics have been forfront in my campaigns.
We never used the magickal versions of the Illithid (Mind Flayer) to Heretical, or any of the other magickal versions either. Alwas the original psi races for us. Never had a problem with balance either.
Oh and I loved the attack and defense modes, it brought the psi combat in like Prof X of the X Men and really brought us away from the Vancian Magickal System :) and into the realms of the mind. Back in the great days when Prof X fought Amal Farouk in the astral realms mind to mind psi blasting and using psi shields :) All the while sitting acros from each other at a table :)
LOL Yeah, that was a problem unles you broke up the turns :)
Well that was dropped from 3.5 psionics and it's not in the Pathfinderised versions either. You can still do it conceptually (sit across the table from one another and not blink an eye while hammering away mentally) but you have to do so in the same time scale as everyone else, and you have to pick the right powers.
Oh and I loved the attack and defense modes, it brought the psi combat in like Prof X of the X Men and really brought us away from the Vancian Magickal System :) and into the realms of the mind. Back in the great days when Prof X fought Amal Farouk in the astral realms mind to mind psi blasting and using psi shields :) All the while sitting acros from each other at a table :)
Tell you what. I'm going to be including a chapter in the book discussing psionics in your campaign, as well as a section for a number of house rules and/or optional materials. I will write a psionic combat system just 'cause you wanted it, and put it in there.
^.^
Yay :) Thanks :)
I want to see Ashiel's Psionic Handbook when it's done :)No problem. It's in the playtesting stages right now, for the most part.
Here is a 3.5 guide. It might save you some time.I want to see Ashiel's Psionic Handbook when it's done :)No problem. It's in the playtesting stages right now, for the most part.
I appreciate the link and helpfulness wraithstrike. ^.^
I mostly meant I needed to playtest and make certain none of the revisions I made increase or decrease the level of power that the psionic characters have too much. Making sure they play well next to PF core characters just fine, and so forth. So far so good.
Even with combos like Vigor + Psicrystal + Share Pain, it's working fine thus far. =P